Appl. Math. Inf. Sci. 10, No.

1, 343-350 (2016) 343

Applied Mathematics & Information Sciences
An International Journal

http://dx.doi.org/10.18576/amis/100136

Optimization for PID Control Parameters on Pitch

Control of Aircraft Dynamics Based on Tuning Methods
G. Sudha and S. N. Deepa
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering,MVJ College of Engineering, Bangalore560067, India and Department of
Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Anna University - Regional Centre, Coimbatore- 641 047, India

Received: 20 Nov. 2014, Revised: 16 Aug. 2015, Accepted: 22 Aug. 2015

Published online: 1 Jan. 2016

Abstract: Today many aircraft control systems and process control industries are employing classical controller such as Proportional
Integral Derivative Controller (PID) to improve the system characteristics and dynamic performance. To improve the stability analysis
and system performance of an aircraft, PID controller is employed in this paper. The safety of flight envelope can be improved by
tuning parameters of PID controller for pitch control dynamics of an aircraft. Designing the mathematical model is necessary and
important to describe the longitudinal pitch control of general aviation aircraft system. PID controller is developed based on dynamic
and mathematical modeling of an aircraft system. The various tuning methods such as Zeigler-Nichols method (ZN), Modified Zeigler-
Nichols method, Tyreus- Luyben tuning and Astrom-Hagglund tuning methods are evaluated for general aviation aircraft system. The
simulation results prove that PID controller parameters tuned by ZN method for general aviation aircraft dynamics is better compared
to the other methods in improving the stability and performance of flight in all conditions such as climb, cruise and approach phase.

Keywords: Pitch Control, PID controller, Optimum Parameters, Tuning methods.

1 Introduction controller parameter for longitudinal pitch control

Many inventions and thousands of experiments are
performed in gliders in developing the first successful
airplane. Wright brothers successful invention motivated
many researchers in designing the dynamic characteristics
of an aircraft. Aircrafts flying qualities is necessary and
important for safe flight envelope. This can be achieved
by evaluating the aircrafts dynamic performance such as
stability analysis and control characteristics. In general,
the poor flying qualities will make the airplane difficult to
fly and could be dangerous in all conditions such as
climb, cruise and approach phase. This paper focuses
mainly in designing the optimum values of PID controller
parameters for general aviation aircraft.
General aviation (GA) flights range from gliders and
powered parachutes to corporate jet flights. General
aviation covers a wide range of operations such as
aviation for agricultural needs, clubs for flying, training
pilots, maintaining and manufacturing of low weight
aircrafts [1] and [2]. Many countries are included as
representatives of all civil and general aviation, belonging
to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).
The main objective of the paper is to design PID
Corresponding author e-mail: sudha.gunasekar@gmail.com
c 2016 NSP
aircraft[3] and [4]. To obtain the optimum parameter
value, various methods such as Zeigler-Nichols method
(ZN), Modified Zeigler-Nichols method, Tyreus- Luyben
tuning, Astrom-Hagglund tuning methods are
employed.[5] and [6]. The ultimate gain constant and
period of oscillation of flight control system is estimated
by employing classical approach such as root locus
method. The approach of the work illustrates time domain
specifications of the system to obtain characteristics
performance of an aircraft [7].
2 Dynamical Equation for Flight Vehicles
The aircraft motion problem consists of two coordinate
systems. One coordinate system is fixed to the earth and
the other coordinate fixed to the airplane called body
coordinate system. The aerodynamic thrust and
gravitational forces acting on an airplane can be resolved
along fixed axis to the airplanes centre of gravity. The
mathematical equations of motion are obtained from
Newtons second law of motion. The forces, moments and
Natural Sciences Publishing Cor.
344
velocity components in the body fixed coordinate of
aircraft system can be described as shown in Figure 1.
The X, Y and Z variables represent aerodynamic force.
The component L, M and N denote aerodynamic moment.
Variables u, v and w denote the velocity components.
Variables p, q and r denote the angular rates. Variables x,
y, z denote the coordinates, with origin at the center of
mass of the vehicle [10]. The x-axis [11] points toward
the nose of the flight. The x-axis and z-axis lie in the
plane of symmetry. The z-axis is perpendicular to the
x-axis, and pointing approximately down. The y-axis is
pointing approximately out the right wing [12].
Fig. 1: Force, moments, and velocity components
The kinematic and dynamic equations can be
expressed as a function of all the motion variables as
force and moment equations. Where g acceleration due to
gravity, q perturbed pitch rate, w perturbed velocity along
Z.
X = mgsin + m(u + qw rv), (1)
Y = mgcos cos + m(w + pv qu). (2)
Moment Equation:
M = I q + rq(Ix Iz ) + Ixz (p2 q2 ) (3)
Equations (1),(2) and (3) completely describe the
longitudinal motion of a flight vehicle, subject to the
prescribed aerodynamic (and propulsive) forces and
moments. The equations are linearized by using small
disturbance theory about an equilibrium flight condition.
The linearized longitudinal equations can be formed by
assuming small deviations about steady flight conditions
[13]. This theory is difficult to be applied to the problems
in which large amplitude motions are to be expected. The
large amplitude deviation is due to spinning or stalled
flight. Yaw is causing the accidents as a stall and spin.
The improper use of rudder is the main cause of yaw. This
can be avoided by proper yaw control mechanisms.
However in many cases the small disturbance theory
yields sufficient accuracy for practical engineering
problems. Hence, the small disturbance theory is good in
c 2016 NSP
Natural Sciences Publishing Cor.
G. Sudha, S. N. Deepa : Optimization for PID control parameters
all flight conditions provided with suitable yaw control
mechanisms.
These equations are nonlinear and coupled, and
generally can be solved only numerically, yielding
relatively little insight into the dependence of the stability
and controllability of the vehicle on basic aerodynamic
parameters of the vehicle. The complete set of linearized
equations of motion is represented in Equations in (4),(5)
and (6). Where Mq dimensional variation of pitching
moment with pitch rate, Mu dimensional variation of
pitching moment with speed,M dimensional variation of
pitching moment with angle of attack,M dimensional
variation of pitching moment with rate of change of angle
of attack,S reference wing area,T thrust,u perturbed
velocity along X,Uo component of steady state velocity
along X,Xq dimensional variation of X force with pitch
rate,Xtu dimensional variation of X force due to thrust
with speed,Xu dimensional variation of X force with
speed,X dimensional variation of X force with angle of
attack,Zq dimensional variation of Z force with pitch
rate,Zu dimensional variation of Z force with speed, Z
dimensional variation of Z force with angle of attack,Z
dimensional variation of Z force with rate of change angle
of attack, perturbed angle of attack, p damping ratio
the phugoid,sp damping ratio the short period,
disturbed pitch attitude angle,1 steady state pitch attitude
angle, air density.
 
d
Xu u + (g0 cos0 ) Xw w
dt
= X e e + X T T (4)
   
d d
Zu u + (1 Zw ) Zw w [u0 + Zq ] g0 sin0
dt dt
= Z e e + Z T T (5)

d
  2
d d

Mu u (M w) Mw w Mq
dt dt 2 dt
= M e e + M T T (6)
where e and T are the aerodynamic and propulsive
controls respectively. The linearized equations give
valuable information of dynamic characteristics of
airplane motion.
3 PID Controller Parameters
In general, PID controller measures the value called error
value which is considered as the difference in value
between the output of the system and required reference
value. The PID controller accomplishes to reduce the
value of error by regulating the pitch control inputs. The
PID controller parameters are called three-term control
such as the Proportional, the Integral and Derivative
parameters depicted as KP , KI , and KD . Tuning the P, I,
and D parameters by a procedural steps of algorithm, the
PID controller can provide control action developed for
Appl. Math. Inf. Sci. 10, No. 1, 343-350 (2016) / www.naturalspublishing.com/Journals.asp 345

specific flight requirements [15],[16] and [17]. The model of an actuator is employed with the transfer
controller output can be represented in terms of error function as given in Equation (9), and time constant = 1
value of the controller, the degree to which deviates the second is employed.
controller reference value, and the measure of oscillation
of the vehicle. The structure is also known as parallel
form and is represented by, 10
H(s) = (9)
s + 10
 
1 1 The transfer function of longitudinal dynamics of
G(s) = KP + KI + KD s = KP 1 + + TD S (7)
s TS general aviation aircraft and actuator dynamics is given in
Equation (10),
where KP is proportional gain, KI is integral gain, KD
derivative gain; TI is integral time constant and TD is
derivative time constant. 110s + 243.8
G(s) = (10)
s4 + 12.7s3 + 43.64s2 + 127.94s

Figure 3 shows step responses of system without

Fig. 2: Block diagram of Aircraft system with PID Controller
The block diagram of general aviation aircraft with
actuator dynamics and PID controller is shown in Figure
2. The proportional term provides the error signal through
controller. The rise time is 1.23 seconds and settling time
is high in the range of 9.12 seconds. The simulation is
carried out using Matlab-R2012a in Intel core processor
i5-3210M, 2.5GHz speed, 4GB RAM. Though overshoot
is less but the response leads to oscillation for longer
period [14]. This leads the aircraft difficult to fly and
make the performance unstable in nature. Table 2 shows
the values of parameters of dynamic response of aircraft
without PID controller.
Step responses of Aircraft Dynamics Without PID Controller

the constant gain factor indices. The integral term helps to 1.4

reduce steady-state error and the derivative term helps to 1.2

improve transient response of the aircraft system. The 1

effect of variation of controller parameter for closed loop 0.8

Amplitude

response is given in Table 1. The PID controller performs 0.6

better compared to independent operations of P, I and D

0.4
term. The selection of gains for the PID controllers can be
0.2
obtained by a different closed loop tuning methods.
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time t (in seconds)

4 Aircraft Dynamics without Controller Fig. 3: Step responses of aircraft dynamics without PID
Effect controller

In general, the non linear aircraft model is complex, and

the complexity arises from the mathematical model of
dynamics. Considering the general aviation aircraft, the
rate of change in the pitch value to the rate of change in
the angle of elevator deflection is given in the Equation
(??).
Stability of the vehicle can be improved by reducing
the oscillations and it can be analyzed by tuning the
parameters of PID controller.

    5 Different Tuning Methods

M Z M Ze Z Me
Me + u0 e s
q(s) u0 u0
The selection of gains for PID controller can be
=
e (s)
   
2 Z Z Mq determined by various tuning methods [18] and [19]. The
s Mq + M + u0 + s + u0 M gains are determined in terms of two parameters, k p u,
(8) called the ultimate gain, and Tu ,, the period of the
oscillation that occurs at the ultimate gain. From Figure 4,
For simplicity and to reduce complexity in the ultimate gain can be obtained as 1.82 and the period
computational analysis of an aircraft system, a first order of oscillation can be determined as 1.2.

c 2016 NSP
Natural Sciences Publishing Cor.
346 G. Sudha, S. N. Deepa : Optimization for PID control parameters

Table 1: Parameters effecting system dynamics.

Closed loop Responses Proportional Gain (Kp ) Integral Gain (KI ) Derivative Gain (KD )
Rise Time Decrease in value Decrease in value Small change in value
Overshoot Increase in value Increase in value Decrease in value
Settling time Small change Increase Decrease
Steady-state error Decrease in value Eliminate No change

Table 2: Effect of closed loop response without controller

Parameters Rise Settling Delay Overshoot(Mp )inTransient
Time(tr )in Time(ts )in Time(td )in percentage Behavior
Seconds Seconds Seconds
Response 1.23 9.12 0.48 23 Oscillation
values

Step Response of ZN Method

Root Locus
1.4
10
System: sys
Gain: 1.82
8 Pole: 0.0352 + 5.15i 1.2
Damping: 0.00685
Overshoot (%): 97.9
6 Frequency (rad/s): 5.15
1
4
Imaginary Axis (seconds1)

2 0.8

Amplitude
0
0.6
2

4 0.4

6
0.2
8

10 0
20 15 10 5 0 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1
Real Axis (seconds ) Time t (in seconds)

Fig. 4: Root locus of an aircraft system Fig. 5: Step Responses of ZN Method

Step Response of Modified ZN Method

1.4

1.2

5.1 Ziegler-Nichols (ZN) Method 1

0.8
Amplitude

0.6

0.4

0.2

In 1942, Ziegler and Nichols first proposed a trial and

0
error tuning method. This method most widely used 0 1 2 3 4
Time t (in seconds)
5 6 7 8

method for tuning of PID controllers[8]. ZN method can

also be called as continuous cycling method or ultimate Fig. 6: Step Response of Modified ZN Method
gain tuning method based on sustained oscillations. The
gain of the controller is gradually reduced or increased
until the system response oscillates continuously after a
small external disturbance or step change. A main design 5.2 Modified Ziegler-Nichols (ZN) Method
criterion is considered as the decay of oscillation to
one-fourth of its initial value. The parameters of the This is similar to ZN method but has modified setting
controllers can be evaluated using the ultimate gain and values for ultimate gain and frequency values as listed
frequency values as listed under Table 3. This method is under Table 3. In closed loop system, to reduce the
applicable for closed loop flight control systems. The amplitude of oscillation by a value of one-fourth its decay
values of gain KP , KI , and KD can be determined as 2.91, ratio forces the peak overshoot to high value and making
1.13 and 1.37. The step response of aircraft dynamics the system undesirable [9]. In such cases, therefore are
using ZN method is shown in Figure 5. other some different methods like modified ZN settings

c 2016 NSP
Natural Sciences Publishing Cor.
Appl. Math. Inf. Sci. 10, No. 1, 343-350 (2016) / www.naturalspublishing.com/Journals.asp 347

can be employed to reduce the peak overshoot value. The
values of KP , KI , and KD can be calculated as 0.7, 0.68
and 0.46. The step response of aircraft dynamics using
modified ZN method is shown in Figure 6.
5.3 Tyreus-Luyben Method
tuning of the plant can be obtained by generating more
points.
The values of KP , KI , and KD can be estimated as
0.784, 1.4 and 0. The step response of aircraft dynamics
using Astrom-Hagglund method is shown in Figure 8.
The value of KP , KI , and KD for different tuning methods
are shown in Table 4.

Tyreus-Luybens method is based on the Ziegler-Nichols

tuning method [20]. The gain of the controller is varied Step Response of AstromHagglund Method
1.6
until the system response continuously changed based on
sustained oscillations. The parameters of the controllers 1.4

can be evaluated with modified settings using the ultimate 1.2

gain and frequency values as listed under Table 3. This is
one of the most conservative tuning methods for the 1

Amplitude
controller parameters to obtain better stability. This 0.8
method only proposes settings for PI and PID controllers.
The values of KP , KI , and KD can be calculated as 0.95, 0.6

2.84 and 0.23. The step response of aircraft dynamics 0.4

using Tyreus-Luyben method is shown in Figure 7.
0.2

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Time t (in seconds)
Step Response of TyreusLuyben Method
1.5

Fig. 8: Step Response of Tyreus-Luyben Method

1
Amplitude

6 Results and Discussion

0.5
The different tuning methods are compared and the results
are shown in Table 5. The step response of different tuning
methods is illustrated in Figure 9.
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Time t (in seconds)

Step Response of Different Tuning Methods

1.6
Fig. 7: Step Response of Tyreus-Luyben Method ZN
Modified ZN
1.4 Astrom Hagglund
Tyreus Luyben
1.2

1
Amplitude

0.8

5.4 Astrom and Hagglund Method 0.6

0.4

This method is proposed by Astrom and Hagglund and 0.2

they used non linear relay feedback [21]. The ultimate
0
gain and period of oscillation can be obtained from the 0 1 2 3 4
Time t (in seconds)
5 6 7 8

limit cycle oscillation of the system. The advantage of

Astrom and Hagglund method will not drive system to
instable condition because of the good estimation of the
ultimate gain. Astrom method is easy to automate and its
procedure avoids a time consuming trial and error method
for obtaining the ultimate gain values. In general, ZN
tuning method has only one point in Nyquist curve. In
this method, by varying limit cycles of the relay relies on
generating several points on the Nyquist curve. Better
Fig. 9: Step responses of aircraft dynamics without PID
controller
The delay and rise time give a measure of how fast the
system responds to a step input. Rise time is less in
Modified ZN method compared to other methods. The

c 2016 NSP
Natural Sciences Publishing Cor.
348 G. Sudha, S. N. Deepa : Optimization for PID control parameters

Table 3: Different Tuning Methods

Tuning Proportional Integral Gain Derivative
Methods Gain KP KI Gain KD
K( pu) (K( pu))(Tu )
Z-N 0.6 K( pu) (2) Tu 8
Method(Ziegler
and Nichols
1942)
Tu Tu
Modified (0.33) K( pu) 2 3
Z-N Method
(Hang et al
1991)
Tu
Tyreus 0.45 K( pu) 2.2 Tu 6.3
Luyben
Method
(Luyben
and Luyben
1997)
Astrom 0.32 K( pu) 0.94 0
Hagglund
Method
(Astrom and
Hagglund
1994)

Table 4: Values of KP , KI and KD and for Different Tuning Methods.

Sl.No Tuning Methods KP KI KD
1 ZN Method 2.91 1.13 1.37
2 Modified ZN 0.7 0.68 0.46
3 Tyreus-Luyben 0.95 2.84 0.23
4 Astrom-Hagglund 0.784 1.4 0

settling time is less in ZN method. Peak overshoot is less 7 Conclusions

in Modified ZN method. Astrom-Hagglund method
response is oscillatory. This leads to instable dynamics of
aircraft. Compared to all methods Modified ZN method
shows good in time response characteristics. Though
Modified ZN method is better but it has high settling time
as 5.5 seconds. Rise time is 1.134 seconds [22] and the
value is high compared to other methods. Compared to
other methods rise time is high but the response of aircraft
settles at low value of settling time [23] and [24].
From the standpoint of aircraft control system design,
the required characteristic is that the system has to
respond rapidly for any change in input. This helps the
flight to fly in safe envelope. By considering the response,
ZN method gives optimal gain values of PID controller
parameters. The results shows ZN method respond
rapidly for any change in input and the response of an
aircraft settles down to the steady state value quickly. The
tuned controller parameters values can effectively
eliminate the dangerous oscillations and provide smooth
operation by settling fast for any sudden change in the
environment. This optimum value works efficiently for
longitudinal dynamics of pitch control aircraft where
safety is high priority.
The lack of control and stability leaves issues resulting in
uncertainties related to vehicle performance, flight safety,
and cost. To achieve fast response and good stability,
tuning the parameters of the controller is essential. The
flight control system parameters may change from its
equilibrium steady state value due to sudden change in
the flight conditions. The changing environment
conditions vary the parameter value and it may have the
tendency to affect the desired performance of a control
system. The designing of PID controller to obtain
optimum values for general aviation aircraft are carried
out in this paper. Various tuning methods such as
Zeigler-Nichols method (ZN), Modified Zeigler-Nichols
method, Tyreus- Luyben tuning and Astrom-Hagglund
tuning methods are employed to obtain optimum
parameters values. This ensures flight safety and
improves characteristics performance of an aircraft. The
knowledge about the controller parameter of an aircraft
system is extremely important from the standpoint of
improved system design, protection, and fault tolerant
control to ensure safety flying conditions.

c 2016 NSP
Natural Sciences Publishing Cor.
Appl. Math. Inf. Sci. 10, No. 1, 343-350 (2016) / www.naturalspublishing.com/Journals.asp 349

Table 5: Comparison of different tuning methods

Sl.No Rise Settling Delay Overshoot(Mp)inTransient
Time(tr)in Time(ts)in Time (td)in percentage Behavior
Seconds Seconds Seconds
ZN Method 0.3 0.6 0.71 37 Smooth
Modified ZN 0.2 0.4 5.5 18 Smooth
Method
Tyreus- 0.45 0.9 3.8 46 Smooth
Luyben
Tuning
Astrom- 0.62 1 5.8 50 Oscillatory
Hagglund
Tuning
Wahid et al 0.24 2.72 1.1 0 Smooth
(2011)
Kada and 0.56 1.134 1.472 0 Smooth
Ghazzawi
(2011)
Nurbaiti and 0.24 2.831 0.727 0 Smooth
Nurhaffizah
(2012)

Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to the anonymous referee for a
careful checking of the details and for helpful comments
that improved this paper.
References
[1] G.H Bryan and W. E. Williams, The Longitudinal Stability
of Aerial Gliders, Proceedings of the Royal Society of
London, Series A 73, 110-116 (1904).
[2] Tobak, Murray Schiff and B. Lewis, On the Formulation
of the Aerodynamic Characteristics in Aircraft Dynamics,
NACA TR Report- 456 (1976).
[3] Q. Wang, and R. F. Stengel, Robust Nonlinear Flight Control
of a High-Performance Aircraft, IEEE Transactions on
Control Systems Technology 13,15-16 (2005).
[4] Snell, and P. Stout, Robust Longitudinal Control Design
Using Dynamic Inversion and Quantitative Feedback
Theory, Journal of Guidance, Navigation, and Control
20,933-940 (1997).
[5] SN. Deepa, and G. Sudha, A Design of Longitudinal Control
of an Aircraft Using a Fuzzy Logic Based PID Controller,
Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Soft
Computing for Problem Solving-Springer 258, 547-559
(2014).
[6] SN.Deepa, and G Sudha,Longitudinal Control of an
Aircraft Using Artificial Intelligence, International Journal
of Engineering and Technology (IJET) 5, 4752-4760 (2014).
[7] G.Sudha and SN. Deepa, Modeling and Approximation of
STOL Aircraft Longitudinal Aerodynamic Characteristics, J.
Aerosp. Eng., 28, 04014072 (2015).
[8] J.G Zieglerand N.B Nichols, Optimum Settings for
Automatic Controllers, Transaction of ASME 64,759-768
(1942).
[9] C.C Hang,J.K Astrom, and W.K Ho, Refinements of Ziegler
Nichols Tuning formula, IEE Proceedings 138,111(1991).
[10] John Anderson, Introduction to Flight, McGraw-Hill, New
York, Fourth Edition (2000).
[11] Bernard Etkin and Lloyd D. Reid, Dynamics of Flight;
Stability and Control, John Wiley and Sons, New York, Third
Edition(1998).
[12] Robert C. Nelson, Flight Stability and Automatic Control,
McGraw-Hill, New York, Second Edition1998.
[13] Barros dos Santos, SR and de Oliveira, Longitudinal
autopilot controllers test platform hardware in the loop,
IEEE International, Systems Conference (SysCon), Montreal,
QC379-386 (2011).
[14] S.N.Sivanandam and S.N.Deepa, Control System
Engineering using MATLAB, VIKAS Publishing company
Ltd, New Delhi, India (2007).
[15] V.Alfaro, V. M., Vilanova and R. Arrieta, Two-Degree-of-
Freedom PI/PID Tuning Approach for smooth Control on
Cascade Control Systems, Proceedings of the 47th IEEE
Conference on Decision and Control Cancun, Mexico13,9-11
(2008).
[16] K.H Ang,G. Chong and LI Yun,PID Control System
Analysis, Design, and Technology, IEEE Transactions on
Control Systems Technology,13 (2005).
[17] V.D Yurkevich, Advances in PID Control, InTech, ISBN
978-953, Rijeka, Croatia307,267-268 (2011).
[18] M. Myint, H.K. Oo, Z.M. Naing and Y.M Myint,
PID Controller for Stability of Piper Cherokees Pitch
Displacement using MATLAB, International Conference on
Sustainable Development: Issues and prospects for the GMS,
China, (2008).
[19] X. Zhou, Z. Wang, H. Wang, Design of Series Leading
Correction PID Controller, IEEE International Conference,
(2009).
[20] W.L Luyben and M.L Luyben, Essentials of Process
Control, McGraw-Hill(1997).

c 2016 NSP
Natural Sciences Publishing Cor.
350 G. Sudha, S. N. Deepa : Optimization for PID control parameters

[21] K.J Astrom and T. Hagllund,PID controllers Theory, G. Sudha has completed
Design and Tuning, second edition, Instrument Society of her PhD Degree in Electrical
America (1994). Engineering from Anna
[22] B.Kada and Y.Ghazzawi,Robust PID Controller Design for University, Chennai, 2014.
an UAV Flight Control System, Proceedings of the World She has published papers
Congress on Engineering and Computer Science 2, 978-988 in International and National
(2011). Journals. Her research areas
[23] Nurbaiti Wahid and Nurhaffizah Hassan, Self-tuning Fuzzy include Neural Network,
PID Controller Design for Aircraft Pitch Control, Third Fuzzy Logic, Genetic
International Conference on Intelligent Systems Modelling
Algorithm, Linear and
and Simulation IEEE Computer Society 19-24 (2012).
Nonlinear Control Systems,Robotics and Aerospace
[24] N.Wahid, N. Hassan, M.F Rahmat and S.
Mansor,Application of Intelligent Controller in Feedback
Applications.
Control Loop for Aircraft Pitch Control, Australian Journal
of Basic and Applied Sciences 5, 1065-1074 (2011).
S. N. Deepa has
completed PhD Degree
in Electrical Engineering
from Anna University,
Chennai, 2008. She was
a gold medalist in her
BE Degree Program. She has
published books and papers
in International and National
Journals. Her research
areas include Neural Network, Fuzzy Logic, Genetic
Algorithm, Linear and Nonlinear Control Systems,
Digital Control.

c 2016 NSP
Natural Sciences Publishing Cor.